Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,420
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 3:
Line 3: − +
→Quote
Another limitation of science is that science is a social enterprise and current societal ideological fashions can impinge on the objectivity of scientists and squash dissent. Also, the [[fall of man]] and man's sinful nature introduces problems into the scientific community such as scientific fraud, scientists engaging in immoral research such as [[eugenics]], egotistical scientists making proclamations beyond their expertise and scientists actively suppressing various truths (see: [[Suppression of alternatives to evolution]] and [[Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation]] and [[Atheism and deception]]).
Another limitation of science is that science is a social enterprise and current societal ideological fashions can impinge on the objectivity of scientists and squash dissent. Also, the [[fall of man]] and man's sinful nature introduces problems into the scientific community such as scientific fraud, scientists engaging in immoral research such as [[eugenics]], egotistical scientists making proclamations beyond their expertise and scientists actively suppressing various truths (see: [[Suppression of alternatives to evolution]] and [[Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation]] and [[Atheism and deception]]).
== Quote ==
== Quotes ==
"The great climate science centres around the world are more than well aware how weak their science is. If you talk to them privately they're scared stiff of the fact that they don't really know what the clouds and the aerosols are doing." <ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/mar/29/james-lovelock James Lovelock on the value of sceptics and why Copenhagen was doomed]</ref>
"The great climate science centres around the world are more than well aware how weak their science is. If you talk to them privately they're scared stiff of the fact that they don't really know what the clouds and the aerosols are doing." <ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/mar/29/james-lovelock James Lovelock on the value of sceptics and why Copenhagen was doomed]</ref>